“Prime Minister, two days ago you signed an agreement with China promising to deliver over 5 million people into the hands of a communist dictatorship. Is that morally defensible or is it really true that in international politics, the highest form of morality is one’s own national interest?”

That was the question I put to British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher at a press conference held in Hong Kong on December 21, 1984. Thirty six years later today, the question is as valid as ever.

On January 31, 2021, the British Government will begin issuing visas to Hong Kong people who are British National (Overseas) (BN(O)) and their dependants to enable them to move to the United Kingdom to begin their six-year path to British citizenship.

Looking at the horrors that took place particularly since the imposition of the National Security Law on June 30, the almost daily arrests of protesters, the muzzling of the news media and the increasingly heavy jail terms handed down by the courts, I was right to take the British Government to task in 1984.

Recent developments in Hong Kong read like a never-ending horror story. On December 1, the city’s biggest pay TV operator, i-Cable, laid off 100 staff members, including 40 from the news department, in an attempt to cut costs because the pandemic has created financial difficulties.

The sacking of 40 journalists prompted the resignation of the entire China news desk and many from the department’s middle management. Some journalists said the bloodbath was due to station management succumbing to political pressure and so launching the savage attack on press freedom and editorial independence. Journalists who have produced high quality news reporting and are respected within the profession suddenly found themselves jobless.

Some people fear journalism in the city may not be able to recover from this onslaught. Others argue that Hong Kong people are stubborn and resilient. But there is no doubt the December 1 massacre has unnerved and dismayed many people. But before they could recover from the i-Cable fiasco, on December 2 they saw three young activists from the disbanded Demosisto given heavy jail sentences.

The three youngsters: Joshua Wong Chi-fung, Agnes Chow Ting and Ivan Lam Long-yin pleaded guilty in the West Kowloon Magistracy to organizing and taking part in unauthorized assembly, which was a 15-hour siege of the police headquarters on June 21, 2019. Magistrate Wong Sze-lai gave Wong a thirteen and a half months jail sentence. Chow got 10 months and Lam 7 months. Some lawyers said the sentencing was manifestly inappropriate and unfair because the three youngsters’ actions did not involve any violence. The heavy jail terms were seen as part of an ongoing campaign to intimidate and stifle opposition voices.

As if to prove this very point, the following day – on December 3, the founder of Apple Daily, Jimmy Lai, who turns 73 on 8 December, appeared in West Kowloon Magistracy with two senior executives from Next Digital. They were accused of defrauding a government-owned enterprise of breaching land-lease terms.

The case was tried by Chief Magistrate Victor So Wai-tak, one of six magistrates handpicked by Chief Executive Carrie Lam to try cases relating to national security. Chief Magistrate So adjourned the case to April 16, 2021, and released the two senior executives on bail. But Lai was deemed a flight risk and refused bail. He has to spend four months and 13 days in detention before his next court appearance.

The court’s refusal to grant bail to Lai was shocking. It was particularly ironic when the police granted bail to triad leader Shanghai Boy Kwok Wing-hung, who returned to Hong Kong on November 22 after absconding for two and a half years for being involved in numerous criminal offences. In the eyes of many Hong Kong people, it is unjust and unfair that Shanghai Boy could get bail but Lai was denied. Such injustice is alien to many Hong Kong people.

The heavy sentencing of the three young activists and the refusal to grant bail to Lai make people worry about the independence of the judiciary, which is the bedrock of the people’s freedoms and personal safety. Given the traumatic developments of the past year, some people are adamant that the rule of law and independence of the judiciary are dead, and the people can no longer rely on the courts to protect their civil liberties and personal safety.

Others argue all is not lost and there are still some upright and independent magistrates and judges who will discharge their responsibilities in a fearless and honorable way. Nevertheless, the outlook is grim. However, I am confident that some Hong Kong people have the courage and determination to continue the difficult struggle for freedom, personal safety and rule of law in a peaceful and nonviolent way.

Those who feel they have had enough may apply for the BN(O) Visa next month and proceed to the UK. Others may want to go to Taiwan, Australia or Canada, which have adopted friendly immigration policies for Hong Kong people. Wherever Hong Kong people may be, I hope they will never forget the people who are doing their level best to make Hong Kong a free and safe city.

(Emily Lau, Chairperson, International Affairs Committee of the Democratic Party)

We invite you to join the conversation by submitting columns to our opinion section: [email protected]

Apple Daily reserves the right to refuse, abridge, alter or edit guest opinion columns for accuracy, length, clarity, and style, and the right to withdraw and withhold columns based on the discretion of our editorial page editors.

The opinions of the writers do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the editorial board.

---------------------------------

Apple Daily’s all-new English Edition is now available on the mobile app: bit.ly/2yMMfQE

To download the latest version,

iOS: bit.ly/AD_iOS

Android: bit.ly/AD_android

Or search Appledaily in App Store or Google Play